Originally Posted by amare

This girl actually wants to start the biggest debate here and i honestly dont get it. Admission averages are based on the demand for the program. The lower the demand the lower the average. Lets say for example (but will probably never happen) that doctors start being paid less because the govt has no money. If there paid less, less people will be interested in the jobs, therefore less damand and than you universities would hardly get any students applying to the medical program so they would lower the admission average to attract more students. In other words if you STILL DONT GET IT averages are based on demand not "level of brightness". I'm not sure if you will understand this though since youre having a hard time understanding the context of what people are saying

If doctors made no money, why would lowering the average attract people anyway?

First, social sciences has less options after you graduate than other undergrad programs. Second, the acceptance average of a program isn't solely based on the program's demand. High averages are a relative way to weed idiots out. And averages are an indication that you have some sort of skill to get in. Just like how you need to take specific prerequisite courses like physics/math/chem to get into engineering or something.

From what I've seen, it seems like the mean average for getting into a program does fluctuate from year to year, but only within a certain percentage range like maybe 80-85%. If anything, the socsci average is lower because on average, people with lower averages apply to that program.

Originally Posted by Desda

If doctors made no money, why would lowering the average attract people anyway?

First, social sciences has less options after you graduate than other undergrad programs. Second, the acceptance average of a program isn't solely based on the program's demand. High averages are a relative way to weed idiots out. And averages are an indication that you have some sort of skill to get in. Just like how you need to take specific prerequisite courses like physics/math/chem to get into engineering or something.

From what I've seen, it seems like the mean average for getting into a program does fluctuate from year to year, but only within a certain percentage range like maybe 80-85%. If anything, the socsci average is lower because on average, people with lower averages apply to that program.

Lowering average for doctors isn't meant to "attract" people. Rather to fill the vacant spots by opening the acceptance range. If you need more students, you keep going down the average tiers until you have enough to fill the spots available.

Acceptance to program is solely based on program's demand. You can test this by comparing the acceptance rate of different school for Engineering.

Engineering is a great program to test this on because it is accredited. Meaning a governing body actually dictate the course outline for a specific school in order to homogenize the material being taught regardless of the school you go to.

You get a more or less the same education for Engineering regardless of the school you go to. Yet, popular schools will have a higher acceptance average (Waterloo) compares to less popular school (I dunno... Ryerson?).

Originally Posted by Desda

I completely overlooked the fact that there are exceptions to everything, my bad.

But what you listed is relatively uncommon and most people go for programs that have a higher guarantee of a high income job after graduation.

Most people in socsci/humanities are still dumb as shit. Why do you think they have the lowest acceptance average throughout most, if not all, schools?

So you've met most people in Soc Sci AND Humanities and determined that they are "dumb as shit." Of all the people I've come across in Soc Sci and Humanities (which has been a lot since I've been here 4 years and have taken now 40 courses with other Soc Sci and Humanities students) I would say most of them are the opposite of dumb as shit. I've definitely met some people that I would classify as dumb as shit, but they are fortunately few and far between.

Lots of people come to University to seek out knowledge and expand their horizons, not just to get a high income job. You can go to College programs or get into a trade and get high income jobs. University for a lot of people in Soc Sci and Humanities seems to be about more than just securing a high paying job after graduation.

There's no guarantees in life. Just because you go into Science or Engineering doesn't guarantee you a higher income job after graduation.

Also Soc Sci and Humanities encompass a ton of different fields which in turn can encompasses hundreds, maybe even thousands of different types of professions after graduation or further schooling after getting your BA.

I could go on but I won't. Your level of ignorance is off the charts, its almost futile to try and reason with a person like you.

Faculty wars are lame.

Originally Posted by sew12

Faculty wars are lame.

Make love not war!

Originally Posted by Desda

I completely overlooked the fact that there are exceptions to everything, my bad.

But what you listed is relatively uncommon and most people go for programs that have a higher guarantee of a high income job after graduation.

Most people in socsci/humanities are still dumb as shit. Why do you think they have the lowest acceptance average throughout most, if not all, schools?

[email protected] life

Originally Posted by Desda

If doctors made no money, why would lowering the average attract people anyway?

First, social sciences has less options after you graduate than other undergrad programs. Second, the acceptance average of a program isn't solely based on the program's demand. High averages are a relative way to weed idiots out. And averages are an indication that you have some sort of skill to get in. Just like how you need to take specific prerequisite courses like physics/math/chem to get into engineering or something.

From what I've seen, it seems like the mean average for getting into a program does fluctuate from year to year, but only within a certain percentage range like maybe 80-85%. If anything, the socsci average is lower because on average, people with lower averages apply to that program.

social science is definitely not the program that has the least options

your ignorance cant even be argued with

Originally Posted by Desda

I completely overlooked the fact that there are exceptions to everything, my bad.

But what you listed is relatively uncommon and most people go for programs that have a higher guarantee of a high income job after graduation.

Most people in socsci/humanities are still dumb as shit. Why do you think they have the lowest acceptance average throughout most, if not all, schools?

Faculty wars = lame.
People who bash their own faculty = even lamer.

If you don't like Soc Sci, then please transfer into a faculty that I don't represent, because you really piss me off.

and just FYI, I know plenty of people who had 90%+ averages who went into Humanities or the Social Sciences, including myself. It's not all "I want the highest paying job I can possibly attain", it's also about what makes you happy, what interests you, & what drives your soul.

FORGIVE ME for not finding mathematics and physic the most fascinating thing of life.

.

I thought Desda was in psychology?

And the only "easy" program at mac is commerce, anyone who says otherwise is lying.

Originally Posted by Rakim

I thought Desda was in psychology?

She's in Psych via Soc Sci, not Life sci, health sci, etc.

i hope she wasnt putting herself on some god level cause she thinks shes the only one who got into soc sci with a relatively high mark

Originally Posted by xo.monica

She's in Psych via Soc Sci, not Life sci, health sci, etc.

If that is the case, I wonder if she is even serious about her comments.

A form of self deprecating joke perhaps?

Desda, I am saying this in the nicest way possible,


Joke or not, shut up.

Originally Posted by Rakim

I thought Desda was in psychology?

And the only "easy" program at mac is commerce, anyone who says otherwise is lying.

as a third year transfer from the faculty of science to commerce, the program is far from easy, in fact other than the Human Resources courses i find them more difficult to obtain a high mark. For most of my courses in the life sciences memorization was the only required skill to get a high mark. Commerce on the other hand requires lots of practice, try taking some upper year accounting courses your opinion of the program will change.

Originally Posted by Commie8507

as a third year transfer from the faculty of science to commerce, the program is far from easy, in fact other than the Human Resources courses i find them more difficult to obtain a high mark. For most of my courses in the life sciences memorization was the only required skill to get a high mark. Commerce on the other hand requires lots of practice, try taking some upper year accounting courses your opinion of the program will change.

If you find commerce hard, something is wrong with you. Sorry.

Originally Posted by Rakim

If you find commerce hard, something is wrong with you. Sorry.

You seem to have a lot of experience within the faculty. Oh wait your in the faculty of science and making baseless conclusions.